High Court of Punjab and HaryanaFAO/999/2025disposed of

Magret And Others v. Sandeep Singh And Others

2025-09-01Mrs. Justice Alka Sarin5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 01.09.2025 MAGRET AND ORS .... Appellants

VERSUS

SANDEEP SINGH AND ORS .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Ms. Kamlesh, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3. ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL) CM-2918-CII-2025 This is an application for condonation of delay of 69 days in filing the main appeal.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 69 days in filing the main appeal is condoned. FAO-999-2025 The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') vide award dated 02.09.2024.

Since the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by the Tribunal, are not being adverted to herein for the sake of brevity.

-25.

The Tribunal in the present case had awarded the following compensation :

Sr. No.

Heads Compensation Awarded Monthly income ₹17,760 Annual income [₹17,760 x 12] = ₹2,13,120 Deduction 1/3rd [₹2,13,120 - ₹71,040] = ₹1,42,080 Future prospects 40% [₹1,42,080 + ₹56,832] = ₹1,98,912 5.

Multiplier of '16'

[₹1,98,912 x 16] = ₹31,82,592 6.

Funeral expenses ₹18,000 Loss of estate ₹18,000 Loss of consortium ₹44,000 Total Compensation ₹32,62,592 Interest In case payment is made within three months, interest @ 6% per annum.

In case payment is not made within three months, interest @ 9% per annum.

Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that the deceased in the present case was 34 years of age at the time of accident and the Tribunal had assessed his income as ₹17,760 which the claimantappellants do not challenge. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would further contend that the claimant-appellants also do not challenge the deduction to the extent of 1/3rd, the addition of 40% made towards future prospects, the multiplier of 16 as applied and the amounts awarded under the conventional heads by the Tribunal. Learned counsel, however, contends that the amount awarded under the head loss of consortium is not in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680],

-3Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. [(2018) 18 SCC 130] and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam M.S General Insurance Company Ltd. [2021(4) RCR (Civil) 642].

Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company has vehemently argued that sufficient amount had already been awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of any enhancement.

Heard.

In the present case, admittedly, no appeal has been preferred by respondent No.3-Insurance Company. Since there is no challenge to the income of the deceased as assessed, the deduction of 1/3rd, addition of 40% made towards future prospects, the multiplier of 16 as applied and the amounts awarded under the conventional heads by the Tribunal, the same are maintained. The amount awarded under the head loss of consortium is not in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Accordingly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra), the claimantappellants, being the widow and the children of the deceased, would also be entitled to compensation under the head loss of consortium to the tune of ₹48,000 each.

10.

Accordingly, the reworked compensation to which the claimantappellants are held entitled to is as under :

-4Sr. No.

Multiplier of '16'

[₹1,98,912 x 16] = ₹31,82,592 6.

Funeral expenses ₹18,000 Loss of estate ₹18,000 Loss of consortium (i) Parental (children) (ii) Spousal [₹48,000 x 2] = ₹96,000 ₹48,000 Total = ₹1,44,000 Total Compensation ₹33,62,592 11.

The amount in excess of and over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal shall also attract interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the realization of the entire amount. The amount shall be apportioned between the claimant-appellants as directed by the Tribunal.

12.

In view of the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parminder Singh vs. Honey Goyal & Ors. [AIR 2025 SC 1713], after calculation of the enhanced amount, the same be transferred by respondent No.3-Insurance Company in the bank account of the claimant-appellants within a period of six weeks from today. The share of the minor claimantappellants shall be kept in an FDR with a nationalized bank fetching maximum rate of interest. The particulars of the bank account along with the requisite documents in support thereof shall be furnished by the claimantappellants to respondent No.3-Insurance company within a period of two weeks from today and needful shall be done by respondent No.3-Insurance

-5Company after verification thereof within a period of four weeks thereafter along with up-to-date interest. The compliance shall be reported by the Bank to the Tribunal concerned.

13.

In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. 01.09.2025 (ALKA SARIN) Aman Jain JUDGE NOTE:

Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: Yes/No